The Moderate Voice - Latest Comments in The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

paul3937 — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 05:21:40 -0000

Mark Sanford is a Narcisistic fool..I am sure his wife is nausated just looking at him and had to move out..Have you seen more recent photos of his girlfriend /soulmate Maria. She truley looks like a female Mark Sanford. He is so self centered and egotistical he is ga ga over a female version of himself. YUCK!

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

paul3937 — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:21:40 -0000

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

Polimom — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 19:24:12 -0000

Leaving aside altogether the clamoring of commenters who want different content here (have they run out of free blog sites or something?) -- this made me laugh right out loud:

What if Sanford were to fall in love with Sarah Palin and run off with her? That will cut down the amount of non-stop blogging about them separately by 50%!

Indulge your imaginations for the briefest moment, and imagine the reactions. Funny, AR! Thanks for the giggle.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

majii — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 14:31:14 -0000

jwest,
The purpose of this article about Sanford is NOT to excuse the misdeeds of those politicians you label as the "left," but to point out the fact that the Republican Party says one thing but does something entirely different which makes it look like it provides cover for their politicians when they really shouldn&#39t if their principles mean anything to them. The Democratic Party doesn&#39t bill itself as the keepers of America&#39s morals, Christianity, or family values. The Republican Party does but does not hold its&#39 politicians to these standards. If the party&#39s principles are good enough to be used as standards for all Americans, why aren&#39t they good enough for its&#39 own members? This is do as I say, not as I do behavior, and it stinks like raw sewage, and damages the republican brand. If the Republican Party wants to enforce its&#39 policies by enacting laws regarding morals, family values, Christianity, etc., it must first address these issues within its&#39 own party. To do otherwise turns these talking points into just more hot air.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

Polimom — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 14:24:12 -0000

Leaving aside altogether the clamoring of commenters who want different content here (have they run out of free blog sites or something?) -- this made me laugh right out loud:

What if Sanford were to fall in love with Sarah Palin and run off with her? That will cut down the amount of non-stop blogging about them separately by 50%!

Indulge your imaginations for the briefest moment, and visualize the reactions. Funny, AR! Thanks for the giggle.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

jwest — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:37:21 -0000

Geoff,

No one is defending Sanford here.

What we are trying to point out is the ridiculous nature of “The Moderate Voice” posting article after article on this subject while completely ignoring more egregious violations of the public trust from the left.

The hypocrisy is breathtaking.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

Geoff2009 — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:37:05 -0000

All politicians who have violated the trust of their constituents should go. Some deserve imprisonment. Fox news is reporting in depth on the Sanford scandal. This is not a partisan issue. Sanford moralized on Clinton and Bob Livingston, demanding Livingston&#39s resignation on moral grounds. "He broke God&#39s law" according to Sanford. Now it is time for the Governor to practice what he preaches - get out and leave the Republican Party lone! How can a party dedicated to respect for the family tolerate this man? Not only has Sanford exposed himself as a fool, he is making his own party look like a party to his own sex party. What a narcissist. And what a shame the Republican Party doesn&#39t take quick action. A few words to Livingston from someone highly placed should be enough to remove him. If not, then a public statement of NO CONFIDENCE will show the Party to have some principles.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

majii — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 09:31:14 -0000

jwest,
The purpose of this article about Sanford is NOT to excuse the misdeeds of those politicians you label as the "left," but to point out the fact that the Republican Party says one thing but does something entirely different which makes it look like it provides cover for their politicians when they really shouldn't if their principles mean anything to them. The Democratic Party doesn't bill itself as the keepers of America's morals, Christianity, or family values. The Republican Party does but does not hold its' politicians to these standards. If the party's principles are good enough to be used as standards for all Americans, why aren't they good enough for its' own members? This is do as I say, not as I do behavior, and it stinks like raw sewage, and damages the republican brand. If the Republican Party wants to enforce its' policies by enacting laws regarding morals, family values, Christianity, etc., it must first address these issues within its' own party. To do otherwise turns these talking points into just more hot air.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

jwest — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 08:37:21 -0000

Geoff,

No one is defending Sanford here.

What we are trying to point out is the ridiculous nature of “The Moderate Voice” posting article after article on this subject while completely ignoring more egregious violations of the public trust from the left.

The hypocrisy is breathtaking.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

Geoff2009 — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 06:37:05 -0000

All politicians who have violated the trust of their constituents should go. Some deserve imprisonment. Fox news is reporting in depth on the Sanford scandal. This is not a partisan issue. Sanford moralized on Clinton and Bob Livingston, demanding Livingston's resignation on moral grounds. "He broke God's law" according to Sanford. Now it is time for the Governor to practice what he preaches - get out and leave the Republican Party lone! How can a party dedicated to respect for the family tolerate this man? Not only has Sanford exposed himself as a fool, he is making his own party look like a party to his own sex party. What a narcissist. And what a shame the Republican Party doesn't take quick action. A few words to Livingston from someone highly placed should be enough to remove him. If not, then a public statement of NO CONFIDENCE will show the Party to have some principles.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

AustinRoth — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 05:21:40 -0000

Ooh, ooh, ooh! I had a GREAT idea!

What if Sanford would fall in love with Sarah Palin, and run off with her? At least that will cut down the amount of non-stop blogging about them separately by 50%!

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

Rudi — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 04:56:50 -0000

You can&#39t expect Stickings to have come up with the Rangel, Murtha and Jefferson stuff since those items are not on Memeorandum today and that&#39s where Stickings derives his independent insightful analyses from.

Did these three run off to a foreign country while Congress was in session? Did they dump their wives for a new &#39soulmate"?

Is Tony Perkins on their Christmas card list?

Newsbusters LMAO ROFL

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

AustinRoth — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 00:21:40 -0000

Ooh, ooh, ooh! I had a GREAT idea!

What if Sanford were to fall in love with Sarah Palin and run off with her? That will cut down the amount of non-stop blogging about them separately by 50%!

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

rudi — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 23:56:50 -0000

You can't expect Stickings to have come up with the Rangel, Murtha and Jefferson stuff since those items are not on Memeorandum today and that's where Stickings derives his independent insightful analyses from.

Did these three run off to a foreign country while Congress was in session? Did they dump their wives for a new 'soulmate"?

Is Tony Perkins on their Christmas card list?

Newsbusters LMAO ROFL

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

ordinarysparrow — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 23:56:41 -0000

guess the King David metaphor is not holding. . . starting to sound a bit like Stanley Kubrick&#39s Eyes Wide Shut. . . with the main difference Tom Cruise managed to not get snuffed but Sanford will likely be sacked politically. . . wonder who the producer of the story really is? Sanford or the media?

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

GreenDreams — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:39:27 -0000

er, I thought this post was about Sanford... Why don&#39t you two just go ahead and rant about "lefties" for awhile.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

casualobserver — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:24:41 -0000

As Artemus Gordon might have said, "Well, that&#39s not really fair, Jim." You can&#39t expect Stickings to have come up with the Rangel, Murtha and Jefferson stuff since those items are not on Memeorandum today and that&#39s where Stickings derives his independent insightful analyses from. However, here is what actually is on Memeorandum, but yes, Stickings would never go near this stuff because it does not fit his agenda of Republican = Bad. WaPo influence peddling 9.5% unemployment Misrepresentation of HELP cost/benefit Helen Thomas on Nixon had more intergrity than Obama Barney Frank on let&#39s spend more TARP money before the taxpayers realize Saddam Hussein interview on trumpeting holding WMD Quinnipiac poll on chink&#39s appearing in the Obama numbers. And GreenDreams dares to criticize lean-rights for "circling the wagons". At least lean-rights dialogue the issues........lefties just pretend they don&#39t exist.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

GreenDreams — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:15:26 -0000

All of those have been covered by the "liberal networks" (owned by Microsoft, GE, Disney, NewsCorp and Time-Warner, those liberal stalwarts.) Those scandals are old news. This is current news. Shall we revisit the old news about GOP scandals too? Why? jwest, seems like a diversionary tactic to me, yet another "they&#39re just as bad" comment, laced with an inaccurate suggestion that the biased media didn&#39t cover them. They did.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

jwest — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:57:46 -0000

Since Mark Sanford is so well covered, I thought it might be interesting to give a bit of information on some scandals not so carefully reported.

This is courtesy of Newsbusters.com

? Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY): The Chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, Rangel coughed up $75,000 in unpaid back taxes on rental income last year. The House ethics committee is investigating whether Rangel fulfilled all of his disclosure requirements related to that property, among other issues. In June, the panel launched another investigation of whether a Caribbean trip Rangel and four other Democrats took amounted to an improper gift.
None of these issues were mentioned on ABC, CBS or NBC this year, although Rangel was featured as a talking head in a number of morning and evening news stories. On March 19, the CBS Evening News included a Rangel soundbite in a story on congressional outrage over the AIG bonuses: “Stop the thievery at taxpayers’ expense!” The next night, CBS had another clip of Rangel railing, “Stop the thievery!,” but no mention of the chairman’s ethics problems.

? Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), Rep. Pete Visclosky (D-IN) and Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA): Three top Democrats are linked to the scandal surrounding the PMA Group, a lobbying group that closed its doors earlier this year after being raided by the FBI in February. The New York Times reported then that top lobbyist Paul Magliocchetti was suspected of funneling “bogus” campaign contributions to Murtha, Visclosky and Moran, in exchange for directing more than $100 million to PMA clients. Rep. Visclosky had admitted being subpoenaed in May by a federal grand jury, and temporarily stepped down as Chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on energy and water development.
None of the broadcast networks have mentioned Visclosky and Moran’s potential role in the scandal. ABC and NBC have been similarly quiet about Murtha, whom the networks elevated to folk-hero status for his condemnations of the Iraq war in 2005. CBS’s Sharyl Attkisson, however, has produced three investigative pieces digging into Murtha’s ethics, the most recent airing on the June 2 Evening News.

? Ex-Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA): Jefferson lost a run-off election late last year after investigators found $90,000 in cash stuffed in the congressman’s freezer. In January, NBC made brief references to the charges against Jefferson in a profile of his successor, Republican Joseph Cao. Jefferson’s bribery trial — prosecutors say he received $400,000 in bribes to help orchestrate business deals in Africa — began on June 9, but the networks have yet to mention the case.

Mark Sanford’s trouble is of his own making, of course. But the liberal networks seem a lot more excited about airing his dirty laundry than exposing the problems of top Democrats.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

ordinarysparrow — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 18:56:41 -0000

guess the King David metaphor is not holding. . . starting to sound a bit like Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut. . . with the main difference Tom Cruise managed to not get snuffed but Sanford will likely be sacked politically. . . wonder who the producer of the story really is? Sanford or the media?

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

GreenDreams — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:39:27 -0000

er, I thought this post was about Sanford... Why don't you two just go ahead and rant about "lefties" for awhile.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

casualobserver — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:24:41 -0000

As Artemus Gordon might have said, "Well, that's not really fair, Jim." You can't expect Stickings to have come up with the Rangel, Murtha and Jefferson stuff since those items are not on Memeorandum today and that's where Stickings derives his independent insightful analyses from. However, here is what actually is on Memeorandum, but yes, Stickings would never go near this stuff because it does not fit his agenda of Republican = Bad. WaPo influence peddling 9.5% unemployment Misrepresentation of HELP cost/benefit Helen Thomas on Nixon had more integrity than Obama Barney Frank on let's spend more TARP money before the taxpayers realize Saddam Hussein interview on trumpeting holding WMD Quinnipiac poll on chink's appearing in the Obama numbers. And GreenDreams dares to criticize lean-rights for "circling the wagons". At least lean-rights dialogue the issues........lefties.......oops, I mean the "moderates".....just pretend they don't exist.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

GreenDreams — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:15:26 -0000

All of those have been covered by the "liberal networks" (owned by Microsoft, GE, Disney, NewsCorp and Time-Warner, those liberal stalwarts.) Those scandals are old news. This is current news. Shall we revisit the old news about GOP scandals too? Why? jwest, seems like a diversionary tactic to me, yet another "they're just as bad" comment, laced with an inaccurate suggestion that the biased media didn't cover them. They did.

Re: The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford

jwest — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:57:46 -0000

Since Mark Sanford is so well covered, I thought it might be interesting to give a bit of information on some scandals not so carefully reported.

This is courtesy of Newsbusters.com

■ Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY): The Chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, Rangel coughed up $75,000 in unpaid back taxes on rental income last year. The House ethics committee is investigating whether Rangel fulfilled all of his disclosure requirements related to that property, among other issues. In June, the panel launched another investigation of whether a Caribbean trip Rangel and four other Democrats took amounted to an improper gift.
None of these issues were mentioned on ABC, CBS or NBC this year, although Rangel was featured as a talking head in a number of morning and evening news stories. On March 19, the CBS Evening News included a Rangel soundbite in a story on congressional outrage over the AIG bonuses: “Stop the thievery at taxpayers’ expense!” The next night, CBS had another clip of Rangel railing, “Stop the thievery!,” but no mention of the chairman’s ethics problems.

■ Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), Rep. Pete Visclosky (D-IN) and Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA): Three top Democrats are linked to the scandal surrounding the PMA Group, a lobbying group that closed its doors earlier this year after being raided by the FBI in February. The New York Times reported then that top lobbyist Paul Magliocchetti was suspected of funneling “bogus” campaign contributions to Murtha, Visclosky and Moran, in exchange for directing more than $100 million to PMA clients. Rep. Visclosky had admitted being subpoenaed in May by a federal grand jury, and temporarily stepped down as Chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on energy and water development.
None of the broadcast networks have mentioned Visclosky and Moran’s potential role in the scandal. ABC and NBC have been similarly quiet about Murtha, whom the networks elevated to folk-hero status for his condemnations of the Iraq war in 2005. CBS’s Sharyl Attkisson, however, has produced three investigative pieces digging into Murtha’s ethics, the most recent airing on the June 2 Evening News.

■ Ex-Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA): Jefferson lost a run-off election late last year after investigators found $90,000 in cash stuffed in the congressman’s freezer. In January, NBC made brief references to the charges against Jefferson in a profile of his successor, Republican Joseph Cao. Jefferson’s bribery trial — prosecutors say he received $400,000 in bribes to help orchestrate business deals in Africa — began on June 9, but the networks have yet to mention the case.

Mark Sanford’s trouble is of his own making, of course. But the liberal networks seem a lot more excited about airing his dirty laundry than exposing the problems of top Democrats.